Hmm... Personally I think that... That there should be very clear rule when planets' population will be added up, and when not. I think that both situations are perfectly valid in same world, but under diffrent conditions/situations. So... This is how I would see that...StuartMorgan wrote:What about if a planet has multiple neighboring planets. Not sure if only the one with the highest population should affect it, or add the populations of them all together and use that combined value...
If one planet in region is able to reach "High Population" status - than mentioned buff is aplied. Getting higher population will give nothing once You managed to aquire "High Population" status. So in this case there is no need for combining population from any other planet. Everything is crystal clear...
But what if somebody was simply unlucky to the point that He has plenty of planets, maybe very good planets, but none of them can get "High Population" status, and can not take roles of "Regional Capital"? And let's add that there is really VAST space to put under some sensible administration?
Of course one thing to solve problem is to make RNG that creates galaxies to not allow that to happen... BOOOOORING! Better option is to give player mechanism to counter such situation...
How about that in certian conditions two planets may form stable administration that is necessary to become "Regional Capital"? Conditions must be crystal clear for that, and would have to require some action taken by player. Or chain of actions that would streghen bonds betwen two planets.
In the end - I think that "bounding" two planets in order to form "Regional Capital" should always be inferior way if compared to having it from one capable planet. Not in it's effect - effect should be the same. But it's costs for doing and sustaining should be bigger.
Should there be possibility to make it from three planets? Sure! Why not? Just... Let's remember - conditions, conditions and one more time conditions... And 3 should be even more costly than 2...